Privatisation and The Crusade of Popular Capitalism

[BLUESGUITARMANIAC]

@daconqueror101

the Internet.

If the power of and vsted interest MONEY didn't matter as you are saying,and that people who have it are just misunderstood,then WHY is the production and hoarding of it always at the cost of the people who DON'T have it?

[BLUESGUITARMANIAC]

I would be more convinced about the supposed benefits to society at large if EVERY household in the country were given a proportion of the 3 billion shares issued.

The fact is that Mrs Thatcher didn't believe in society(except for the people who had money of course)and that this privatisation gave the bigger hogs the pride of place at the trough in what predictably became a free for all.

[BLUESGUITARMANIAC]

The only problem with 'Popular Capitalism' (the creative and INGENIOUS use of language is the only real selling point from this era-the fact that Charles sattchi is in this clip lauding this idea to the heavens contributed to hoodwinking the public at large) at the time, is how people who knew how to CAPITALISE and knew how money worked benefitted more than the general public who this was supposedly aimed at.

[324wilson]

Can anyone tell me the full title of this documentary?

[mikesheen741]

@324wilson I think it's called "tory tory tory".

[bobzilla211]

thatcher didn't reduce the power of the government she strengthened it.

[starstruckone]

whats next? health service? there arnt any more big gains to be made its all gone. and were still skint.

[daconqueror101]

I love how everybody who is complaining about privatization here is using internet provided by a private company, is watching youtube which is a private company and is using at their privately made computer. And look at all the freedom that they have that hasn't been taken away by the evil rich. I mean, can you imagine a private company showing videos online? They would only show videos that praise the rich! Maybe youtube should be nationalized! You guys are ridiculous.

[UnitedBritannia]

@daconqueror101 Excellent point, so well made. Ridiculous is the only word to use!

[PK9602]

@daconqueror101 That's not the whole story.. Whilst the Internet as we know it today in it's current form wouldn't exist without valuable contributions from the private sector, it does owe it's birth to government subsidised university research. Government alone couldn't have built today's Internet, but private industry, left to its own devices, wouldn't have, either. Ditto Computers.

Also corporate censorship can and does happen, look at the policies Apple are persuing with their app store.

[Elcristoph]

@daconqueror101 its stupid isnt it, almost everything used both products and services are created and provided by the imaginations of private people financed by private investment. in other words they take the risks and they reap the rewards with there own money.. this is capitalism, yet in the UK if you say your for capitalism your viewed as been evil.. its just stupid

[kilikiss]

@daconqueror101 I didn't realise there were any nationalised internet services we could choose from, without that choice I find it difficult to decide whether nationalisation is more or less effective. Besides which just go onto google and type in 'net neutrality' and you will see a number of ways in which private companies could encroach on our freedom if they are not regulated properly.

[daconqueror101]

@kilikiss If those companies are really encroaching on your rights without you signing a contract with them, then the government can step in and protect your rights, by enforcing the law, not by nationalization and regulation. Regulation will lead to some commission, and the commissioners will be former employees of the companies they are regulating and will give them secret favors. Or, they will give secret favors and then go work for the company for a high salary. That's the real world.

[colcfc123]

@daconqueror101 Lets look at the internet then Tim Berners -Lee who could have been greedy like your capitalist friends decided to give it away for free so we could all benefit. Youtube would not be free without this as it makes money from advertising alone no charge for the internet. Privatisation is purely for profit for the share holders and owners. Most workers for such wonderful companies like Top Shop Vodafone are paid minimum wage with poor terms and conditions. Capitalism stinks

[MasterlyApprentice]

@colcfc123 Capitalism gives people the chance to change it. If you work for minimum wage in a socialist society, you will work like that for the rest of your life. Under capitalism, one has the ability to use their wits to make something more of themselves.

[colcfc123]

@MasterlyApprentice Capitalism works by exploitation of the work if you work for Vodafone most workers are payed minimum wage yet the company makes millions, the profits are not shared with shop workers just share holders and owners. Banks exploit customers the interest rate is set at 0.5% by the bank of England this is not passed on to borrowers or mortgages again only the select few profit. Not to mention the "old boy network" the Tory government is a prime example all public school & rich.

[MasterlyApprentice]

@colcfc123 "Tory government is a prime example all public school & rich." WRONG. Absolutely wrong. My local MP is a Tory, he went to public school, just like everybody else, and studied at Hull university.

The Labour candidate for my area was born in a castle, went to private school and studied at Oxford University.

This whole Tory for the rich, Labour for the poor nonsense is nought but a scam intended to fool the working masses into voting Labour, and sadly it works.

[colcfc123]

@MasterlyApprentice Take a look at the current parliament full of public school millionaires. Who indeed hide their millions in spouses names and off shore banks to avoid tax . The Tories have come up with this " Big Society" idea that involves cutting services to the poor and needy, cutting public sector jobs and attacking the unemployed and sick. Sadly the poor do vote Tory otherwise they would never get in. This is cause of Murdoch ad the right wing press. Tory party keeps the rich-rich

[MasterlyApprentice]

@colcfc123 I think you mean to say "Private" school, as public school is the free one that us poor people go to. But you're simply playing on a decades out-of-date stereotype of rich Tories. Did you know that the Labour front bench is richer than the Tory front bench?

The Tories attack the unemployed who are out of work because they're too lazy to get a job. Unemployment benefits should be used to support people looking for work, not provide them with an alternative.

[colcfc123]

@MasterlyApprentice No you mean state school, Public schools are far from free they include Eton, Harrow they charge £30,000 per year. Pupils are usually from families whose father , and fathers father went to the same school. This is how the "Old boy network" works. Then they go to oxbridge and join the family firm Private Schools exist but they are wanna be Eton, Harrow most of their students can not join the "old boy"network may go to Bristol but no family firm for them. That is the way

[MasterlyApprentice]

@colcfc123 A public school and a state school are the same thing... You're talking about private schools. And you really ought to stop talking about them as if you know all about them, as you clearly don't.

[Malthus0]

@MasterlyApprentice I know that it is confusing but the independent schools that have been going often for centuries are called the public schools. The reason is probably because in the context of their opening the main form of education was private tutoring. While in contrast the new schools were open to general 'public' applications. The truth is that nether you nor colcfc123 are wrong you are just using a different terminology colcfc123's being more peculiarly British in context.

[MasterlyApprentice]

@Malthus0 Fair enough, although I still can't help but disagree with his argument that one must have gone to a £30k per year private school in order to succeed. Sounds like quitter talk to me.

[colcfc123]

@MasterlyApprentice If you disagree with my argument that one must go to a £30.000 per year public school to be in a position of power take a look at the current British parliament. The vast majority are Public school millionaires. That must add weight to my argument.

[MasterlyApprentice]

@colcfc123 It adds about as much weight to your argument as saying "You must be black to win an Olympic medal."

[colcfc123]

@MasterlyApprentice I fail to see the connection. Maybe I am missing the point. The evidence that the power is in the hands of the people rich enough to attend public schools is there in the British parliament. They are backed up by the Tory press and Murdoch controlled media. They are backed by big business and control the worlds oil resources by outing any leader that disagrees with their policies as in Iraq and now Libya. Thinly disguised as "War on terror" It's all about power & money

[MasterlyApprentice]

@colcfc123 The world has ALWAYS been about power and money. Capitalism simply gives everybody with brains an even chance which brings me back to my original point that capitalism is infinitely preferable to socialism.

[colcfc123]

@MasterlyApprentice The world may have always been about power and money, but the working class people who would have learnt a skill and found employment in the mines or manufacturing industries in many areas of the UK have had their jobs taken as it was cheaper to buy foreign imports. This has had a terrible effect on whole communities. The price of this is high as a under class of people with no work or future now exist. They claim benefits and cost money. The down side of capitalism

[MasterlyApprentice]

@colcfc123 Labour had 15 years to sort out that problem, instead of retraining them, they simply gave them benefits or created fake jobs to bring unemployment figures down.

The downside of capitalism as you claim is that people who are too lazy to find or train for a new job don't get to live in luxury.

I say it's exactly how it should be!

[MasterlyApprentice]

@colcfc123 In proper argument however, you're looking in the wrong place for powerful people. First ask yourself "Who are the most powerful men in the world?" Not parliament, not the US congress. The most powerful men in the world are the owners and CEOs of the big corporations. Who owns the biggest corporations? Definitely not private schoolboys!

[colcfc123]

@MasterlyApprentice Yes indeed the most powerful people in the world are CEOs and the owners of big corporations. However they lobby and fund political parties and the Media. Then they get what ever they ask for lower taxes privatisation of the public sector, cheap loans for business development, tax breaks, wage war on countries who do not work with them to control oil in the name of human rights.

[MasterlyApprentice]

@colcfc123 Corporations get lower taxes and cheap loans because they generate all of the wealth in the world. Everything we take for granted is because of corporations. We have the internet because of telecom corps, we have ipods because of Apple, we have music and games and entertainment and cars and houses and gourmet meals because of corporations. You seem to be going in circles, is there any real substance to your point or do you really wish we all lived in block houses eating protein paste?

[colcfc123]

@MasterlyApprentice I am surprised how much faith you have in these corporations! They are the exact reason why Capitalism is failing. The products such as ipods- pads are marketed in a way that makes us all want them, Apple make them using cheap labour and make millions while they exploit the workers and the consumer pays top price. You mention the internet Tim Berners Lee who invented the internet gave it away for free. Socialism works for all not just the greedy.

[MasterlyApprentice]

@colcfc123 Socialism works? Have you seen what happened to Russia.

[colcfc123]

@MasterlyApprentice Not very bright argument cause Russia was a Communist Dictatorship

[MasterlyApprentice]

@colcfc123 The Union of Soviet SOCIALIST Republics was a colossal failure and a perfect example of why socialism DOES NOT work.

[colcfc123]

@MasterlyApprentice The Communist dictatorship of the USSR is or was not Socialism not really a failure either They gave the West a run for their money as have Cuba and China. For a definition of Socialism you need to read Marx, Who looked at workers owning the means of production and profits shared equally, not just the greedy few. Not rocket science just common sense. Why should people like the royals live the life while we pay, just cause of birth rite. W e are all human.

[MasterlyApprentice]

@colcfc123 You call China socialist? USSR challenged the power of the west (before collapsing) and you consider this to be a good thing? Cuba is and always has been a dump. You're not holding your end of the argument very well.

But you're right, we are human. That is why Socialism WILL NEVER work because of human nature.

[colcfc123]

@MasterlyApprentice No I call China Communist and it is one of the most powerful countries in the world. Cuba is far from a dump. Mate sorry to about your family probs. For what its worth my childhood was no basket of fruit either. I also work hard never claimed a bean have two kids bills, mortgage. but all I am saying is that the playing field is not even. If I was born into a rich family with connections my life would be better. its not what you know its who you know. That is fact.

[colcfc123]

@MasterlyApprentice So I have sent three examples of why Capitalism is failing. So give me some substance for you argument or do you want us to eat cake

[MasterlyApprentice]

@colcfc123 And as for "do you want us to eat cake". That would be a very good quote if I were rich and powerful, or from a rich family, but I'm not. My mother is disabled, my father left before I was born, almost my entire family is either unemployed or working for minimum wage. But I accept that their failings were their own, and I am determined not to make them. Our society gives us that chance.

[colcfc123]

@MasterlyApprentice The term public does imply that they are open to all. The term public school is used for Eton, Harrow, these are not state schools. Do some research then tell me I am wrong.

[Malthus0]

@colcfc123 ''Capitalism works by exploitation of the work if you work for Vodafone most workers are payed minimum wage yet the company makes millions'' Let me ask; are you a paid up marxist? As this is the only way that your statement would make sense. Without holding Marxist surplus labour theory the term exploitation loses its bite. It ether ceases to exist as a bad term or just becomes unobjectionable. Like the word 'hired'.

[colcfc123]

@Malthus0 My opinion does not need to be backed up by membership of any group. I strongly disagree with child abuse but that does not mean I have to be a paid up active member of the NSPCC. I feel I am just stating the bleeding obvious. For what it is worth I am an active trade union member. The term exploitation speaks for itself. You can go into the workers owning the means of production and the alienation of the work force. But to be honest there is too much water under the bridge for that

[Malthus0]

@colcfc123 ''The term exploitation speaks for itself'' No it doesn't that is the problem. Just because something seems 'bleeding obvious' to you does not mean it makes sense when examined. What does it even mean in the context of voluntary market interactions. It cannot mean the small no. cases of bad mistreatment when used in such generality, yet it would be meaningless to call all market employment exploitation as an accusation unless there is a real alternative.

[colcfc123]

@Malthus0 Well I do not see the reason to complicate things to me the term exploitation of the most vulnerable and lower paid members of the work force speaks for it's self. They have no union often no sick pay or pension scheme and if they make a fuss they are disciplined out by the company policy and procedures. This happens I know people who have gone through this. I am lucky enough to be in a position due to my skills to by well paid and get good terms and conditions but many can not

[MasterlyApprentice]

@colcfc123 Everybody who works for a company with more than a certain number of employees is entitled to join a Trades Union. Working for a low wage is for people who either are incapable of doing a skilled job, or for people who are looking for a quick bit of cash, ie in the summer holidays. These people are not "vulnerable" at all.

[colcfc123]

@MasterlyApprentice I work in a field that I meet alot of people from estates in inner city areas. I work with young people who live a really tough life peer pressure to join gangs and deal drugs or stolen goods is huge. The role models for the young males are gang leaders who have nice clothes, expensive cars and lot's of female attention. They have been excluded from school have little education no chance of employment due to criminal convictions. These people are VERY VULNERABLE. ( cont)

[MasterlyApprentice]

@colcfc123 I grew up in one of those areas, and there's no excuse for criminal behaviour, and blaming it on capitalism is absolute folly.

Blame it on policing, blame it on the education system, blame it on useless parents, but don't blame it on people who were successful and rightly have earned a lot of money.

[colcfc123]

@MasterlyApprentice Well would you say the bankers rightly earn their bonuses? The whole system is rotten to the core. The interest rate from the bank of England is 0.5 % this is not passed on to the rest of us as a saver you get 2. 5% if you are lucky , if you borrow for mortgage or business loan you pay a fortune. Most people myself included have invested their money in metals therefore give no money to the banks. the recession has only just started and will get worse capitalism is fail

[MasterlyApprentice]

@colcfc123 Bankers earn their bonuses because they scored the jobs. What's the point in being jealous? I'm glad you're not in charge, if you were we'd all live in block apartments and have nothing to look forward to other than a hard day's work.

[colcfc123]

Respond to this video... Jealousy has nothing to do with it. I am angry and righteous anger. Look at the case on Friday when yet again a banker has lost Billions and was out of control . Who will pay for that? Not the poxy banks they pass it on to me.

[colcfc123]

@MasterlyApprentice (continued from 1st point) You say that Capitalism gives you the chance to change! Yes it is possible for a non public school person who does not have family connections to succeed but it is very unusual. Most large companies are run and owned by rich well connected people and they keep it that way. The same as MPs its not what you know its who you know. Its despite capitalism that we have NHS and benefits not because of it, Look how the Tories are attacking benefits

[MasterlyApprentice]

@colcfc123 I know lots of people who didn't succeed in education, yet succeeded in the business world. I know lots of people who DID succeed in education and still succeeded in the business world. Not one of them from a rich family.

Also, the Tories are stripping benefits from people who don't deserve them, while letting people who do deserve them and NEED them stay on.

[colcfc123]

@MasterlyApprentice The benefits /grants are being striped from many voluntary groups these include the elderly and youth clubs. Cutting such groups is both short sighted hitting the poorest and most needy members of the community. These include Library closures where people can go to use the internet and read papers and books. How is this justified ?

[MasterlyApprentice]

@colcfc123 Name some councils which are closing libraries for me. Also, are you a poor and needy member of the community?

[colcfc123]

@MasterlyApprentice I can name you Wandsworth council who are closing libraries on the Winstanly estate. No I am fine thanks but I look out for those who are not

[MasterlyApprentice]

@colcfc123 In continuation: benefits and the NHS, indeed ALL public services are supported by the income generated by the manufacturing industries (Private sector companies). It is the private sector which generates all of the wealth upon which the public sector, including the NHS and benefits, take their money.

The stronger the capitalists are, the stronger the public sector.

[Cream147player]

@daconqueror101 Privatisation is not exclusively good. There are things that just shouldn't be privatised. The NHS for example. I think most rational people don't have a problem with privatisation, there's just a debate as to where the line should be drawn.

[Scientisticsoviet]

@daconqueror101 This is actually a faulty argument, given it depends implicitly on a modified version of the naturalistic fallacy (The exact name of which eludes me at the moment).

To bring the point home clearly: Would the people in the Soviet Union be ridiculous/illogical to complain about nationalized industries and yet use the very same services provided by said industries?

[Nunov103]

@daconqueror101 you took the words right out of my mouth :)

[atosafi1]

@daconqueror101 love how those who complain about the State being incompetent, ineffective and evil fail to realize that the internet is a government invention, the computer is a government invention and the GPS is a government invention.

Without government we'd all be living in shacks, with no running water, no electricity, no police, no post offices or mail delivery, no firefighting, no military, no public transport, no free education, no free healthcare and bonegrinding poverty for all.

[daconqueror101]

@atosafi1 First point. I never said the state has never invented anything, but at what cost and with what efficiency did it invent those products. Second point. The private sector has invented the majority of things that exist. It would be ignorant to assume the private sector could never invent the internet. Third point. There is a purpose for the state. It is to protect liberty. The purpose of the state is not to give you free things.

[daconqueror101]

@atosafi1 The only way the state can give you something for free is if it takes the wealth produced by one person and shares it with you or if it forces a slave to produce something for free. Forced slavery (involuntary work without compensation) is an obvious violation of personal liberty and spreading the wealth is the confiscation of the fruits of ones labor. Socialists assume that capitalists are anti-labor. On the contrary, we are the ones fighting so labor can keep what it EARNS.

[atosafi1]

@daconqueror101 "My goal in life is to make life more pleasant for the vast majority, I do not care if it simultaneously becomes less comfortable for the wealthy minority." Joseph Chamberlain

[324wilson]

@daconqueror101 I was thinking the very same things when seeing these absurd and baseless comments! You should read this wonderful new book "Why Margaret Thatcher Matters" by Claire Berlinski.

[newblenderbeer]

Thatcher did a better job of wrecking the country than anyone else in history.

[belzeebub1]

When telecom nz was sold off in the 80's it became a monopoly which gave every NZder ridiculous charges for about 20yrs until the government finally regulated the industry. When they privatised air new zealand they ran it into the ground, in the end the government ended up buying it back for way more than they had sold it . The same happened to the railways, of which they didnt invest in public transport at all besides use the same old existing tracks and trains dating back to olden days.

[petragurney]

her speech is very moving and it makes your hair stand

[hayden50]

@petragurney what a Great woman.true wisdom..

[screammac]

privertisation lets have a look how a sistem that dosent work and dosent care about the services just the money renatinals thes severs and things would work agen from the trains to bt to cheaper oil yes if its own run bay the state and not privet

[leyshonzi]

im so glad were right wing!!

[SirCliveCalculator]

When you take power from the state, it is grabbed by corporations... that isn't freedom.

[pimpUK1]

@SirCliveCalculator even tho anyone can own shares in that company??????????

[SirCliveCalculator]

@pimpUK1 Anyone? Only the rich have that power. And only then its about profit... see BP and Enron for further details.

[pimpUK1]

@SirCliveCalculator Oh so theres a minimum amount of capital someone must have to buy shares? No, anyone can, obviously the richer you are the more shares you can buy but you can loose every penny. . To me its eems you would rather the people that you in government sponge off you by increasing their pay for little work than pay a company the deserves the money. BP has just cocked up, it and its share holders are suffering

[pimpUK1]

@pimpUK1 sorry should of proof read that before posting lol, hope you can decipher it.

[SirCliveCalculator]

@pimpUK1 blah blah blah. capitalism's failed. end.

[smoochym]

"blah blah blah. capitalism's failed. end."

Of course, thats why every single country in the world uses it. Except North Korea of course.

[smoochym]

You failed, your parents failed, your teachers failed, capitalism doing fine.

[Oneandoneself]

@getmadgetmad1 we can recover

[screammac]

its not freedom its give to the gred so they can do what they like cose of prvertisation nothing works trains not on time and bus hosing sistem dont work nothing works anymore and tyhing cost more and then you get a worse servise then before

[MiraginXXX]

100 percent of the population owned shares .. The assets of the nation should belong to the nation ! ..

[MiraginXXX]

130p Each ? .. 3.7 billion for the treasury ? .. Enfranchise the people ? .. Which people ? .. The likes of saatchi and saatchi perhaps ? ..

[DystopianUtopia]

The guy at the end is 100% right.

[Scoforever]

We need another Thatcher.

[italy2009isolv]

I don't think were going to get another one soon though!!!

[NatDemUK]

You have had Tony Blair, he is one of them

[userblue]

He's bloody not.

[NatDemUK]

He pretty much is since he is seen as a betrayal to the working class in Britain where the gap between the rich and the poor has increased.

[userblue]

Whereas under Thatcher, the wealth gap actually narrowed. Only under Labour class divides begun to fossilise.

[NatDemUK]

Under Thatcher unemployment started to thrive in the industrial towns in Northern England and Wales such as the closing down of the mines and there was the poll tax as well that sparked a few angry protests as well.

[userblue]

the mines were the mines, they had to go. It was painful but necessary, and social mobility rose even in spite of the unemployment.

Under this government, it has become once again extremely difficult for anyone to rise, as easier for incompetents at the top to stay there.

[NatDemUK]

They had to go because she privatised the National Coal Board to Ian MacGregor who therefore thought it was to shut down all the mines just because they were not making enough profit. Since then we have been importing coal from all the mine fields in Eastern Europe which have ousted our coal fields leaving us with a lot of people on the dole and crime, also we are in the EU, which is fixated by this NWO global warming myth which will not allow our industry back because of their heavy bureaucracy

[michealhoward]

like a hole in the head!

[seppsters]

@Scoforever

Every country should have a Thatcher.

[BLUESGUITARMANIAC]

@seppsters Why?

[nico3212]

Jesus! Youd have to have a "mental condition" if you view as "slavery" being considerate & mindful of other people, of your fellow man! This is nothing more the unashamed promotion of egoism! Yes Thatcher, blabber on! Lets see if you'll make it to heaven with your "material things", ignoring the gospel! I personally dont feel "enslaved" of being mindful of the man sitting next to me! Oh yes, the individual is sacred & important! BUT THEN, ITS REPLICATED & MULTIPLIED 6 BIILLION TIMES! Socialism!

[PBLEY]

The so-called Popular Capitalism has recently blown up in their greedy Thatcher fanatical faces.

[gopconservative78]

Thatcher was a true Leader, Brown is a shadow Leader compared to Thatcher

[celtagas]

oh yes she was a great leader. nat

even though this country hates her living guts and wants her to just die away. oh yes a great sucess lol

[theredraven]

No, her little system works as long as bankers don't abuse it.

Maybe Mr Brown should have been a bit more careful when he sold the gold reserves off cheap.

[theredraven]

You do know half of the 3 million in the 80's were put out of work by Harold & Jim right?

[rayyyyyy1]

Selling off our national assets on the cheap was always going to come back to haunt us.

We are all paying the price now. Relying on casino capitalism is a recipe for disaster.

[UnitedBritannia]

Indeed - this was the period during which Britain really was "Back". And the Conservatives handed over a strong, balanced and sound economy over to Labour in 1997 and just look at us now!

Borrowing at it's highest levels EVER, unemployment quickly rising, sterling at it's weakest in a generation and taxation set to rise in the middle of what looks to be the worst recession in a generation.

These problems are not the fault of Thatcher - they are the fault of this current Labour government!

[litlemadguitarist]

@UnitedBritannia Id say that there would have been no difference what so ever. Labor, Conservative, Liberal, all are the same. They make promissesn, dont keep them. Its the same thing EVERY TIME: high expectations then dissapointment!

[UnitedBritannia]

@litlemadguitarist I totally understand your sentiment - it's a very widely held view of course. I don't happen to share it personally - I generally prefer a more optimistic view (perhaps I will learn with age - there is plenty of time for disappointment!). If you look at the premierships of Thatcher, Churchill, Attlee and Lloyd-George, for example, you may very well disagree with their policies but they did actually achieve a great deal in their own ways and deliver on promises they made.

[UnitedBritannia]

@litlemadguitarist Every democracy has it's historical giants on the one hand, and it's political pygmies on the other. For every Churchill there are 3 Eden's.

[worcesteradam83]

shes great

[rayyyyyy1]

Disagree with tomwash. If most people in the UK had voted in their self interest she would have only got about 5% of the votes.

What she stood for was aspiration and fear of change.

[tomwash1]

Giving us a chance to part own a company that we owned in the first place, Thatcher stood for one thing and one thing only, selfishness!

[rayyyyyy1]

UB there are statistics available for everything ive said as surely you know.

Yes we do have different ideas but that does not mean we can not learn from each others views.

[rayyyyyy1]

UB you claim that Thatcher restored law and order. But look back to those days. Huge rise in crime,murder rates,riots on streets of a scale not seen for hundreds of years.

She sold off UK assetts on the cheap and used the north sea oil revenue to keep millions out of work. Not exactly seen as a glowing success by most people.

[UnitedBritannia]

If you've any actual evidence for these claims, by all means reply with them. Failing that, there seems little point in continuing this debate. We have completely different views and they will not be changed on either side - that is not in doubt...

[jinkedful]

@UnitedBritannia "evidence" being the key issue here... so much bullshit is peddled around thatchers image

[UnitedBritannia]

@jinkedful I quite agree with you - the mythology surrounding Thatcher has made reasoned debate about her premiership virtually impossible in this country. Both her opponents and her supporters are guilty of peddling these myths. Instead of detailed analysis of her policies we usually just get partisan rants heavy on symbolism and posturing and light on substance.

[UnitedBritannia]

First of all - let me be the first to say that the Poll Tax was a grave mistake and fundamentally flawed. The basic principle of it - not to scrutinise home-owners more than those who do not own property - may have been right but the policy itself should never have been. I prefer VAT to income tax since it does allow people to keep more of thier own money to spend how they see fit - and we do (rightly) want good public services so tax revenue has to be raised. VAT is the lesser of evils.

[rayyyyyy1]

Popular capitalism eh! Not so popular now. Millions of US citizens are now giving up their homes. Shares are falling and more and more people are losing jobs and money.

Capitalism is only popular when the media are succesful in brainwashing people that a society where 2% of the population owning 80% of the wealth is in their interests.

[UnitedBritannia]

I don't think you quite understand the use of the word 'Popular' here. She isn't referring to Capitalism as being 'liked'. This is about Capitalism enfranchising the public (thus, popular) in the economic life of a nation. See: Right to Buy Policy, Privatisation of public utilities for higher share ownership, lower rate of taxation - for both skilled and unskilled labour, monetary policy resulting in low inflation and higher levels of personal saving in bank accounts = Thatcherism at it's best.

[UnitedBritannia]

And if you want to discuss the fall of Law and Order in Britain than let's do so. It was under those weak Conservative/Labour governments that we saw the rise of the militant left. Strikes called when the workers didn't want them, secondary picketing closing down businesses where there were no conflicts, the 3-Day week - and the list goes on. Thatcher's administration restored Law and Order in this country when Scargill and his followers were systematically attempting to dismantle it.

[Reazzurro90]

are you two braindead?

[LondonKumamoto]

look what a mess Thatcher got everyone into, greed greed and ego

[rockthegorilla]

Yep it's all her fault!